20 Nov
2007
20 Nov
'07
5:50 p.m.
On Nov 20 2007 15:16, KOVACS Krisztian wrote:
I was wondering if the name 'tproxy' is the best, can you see any other useful function of the table apart from tproxy?
a table-to-be-consulted-after-nat :) hmm 'mangle_afternat' or postnat, or something?
I'm not against naming it tproxy, but the first reason to drop the tproxy table was to avoid a tproxy specific table.
That's a good point. Let's ask Patrick.
Ideally there is this supermassive plan of a number of people to refactor iptables one way or the other so that you do not /have/ to create a tproxy table in the first place ;-)